lticast-range-not-delegated.example.com> 844d1c3e   
   XPost: rec.audio.opinion, alt.religion.scientology   
   From: jennconductsREMOVETHIS@mac.com   
      
   In article ,   
    flipper  wrote:   
      
   > On Sat, 28 Aug 2010 19:18:21 -0700, Jenn   
   >  wrote:   
   >   
   > >In article ,   
   > > flipper  wrote:   
   > >   
   > >> On Sat, 28 Aug 2010 18:49:38 -0700, Jenn   
   > >>  wrote:   
   > >>   
   > >> >In article ,   
   > >> > flipper  wrote:   
   > >> >   
   > >> >> On Sat, 28 Aug 2010 06:49:43 -0700 (PDT), Clyde Slick   
   > >> >>  wrote:   
   > >> >>   
   > >> >> >On Aug 28, 1:28 am, flipper  wrote:   
   > >> >> >> On Fri, 27 Aug 2010 09:33:23 -0700 (PDT), "Shhhh!!!! I'm Listening   
   > >> >> >> to   
   > >> >> >>   
   > >> >> >>   
   > >> >> >>   
   > >> >> >>   
   > >> >> >>   
   > >> >> >> Reason!"  wrote:   
   > >> >> >> >On Aug 26, 10:38 pm, Jenn  wrote:   
   > >> >> >> >> On Aug 26, 8:21 pm, flipper  wrote:   
   > >> >> >>   
   > >> >> >> >> > On Thu, 26 Aug 2010 19:11:00 -0700, Jenn   
   > >> >> >>   
   > >> >> >> >> >  wrote:   
   > >> >> >> >> > >In article <5u1e76hjc3mb3j37qdu0ujvqein31at...@4ax.com>,   
   > >> >> >> >> > > flipper  wrote:   
   > >> >> >>   
   > >> >> >> >> > >> On Thu, 26 Aug 2010 16:59:07 -0700, Jenn   
   > >> >> >> >> > >>  wrote:   
   > >> >> >>   
   > >> >> >> >> > >> >In article ,   
   > >> >> >> >> > >> > flipper  wrote:   
   > >> >> >>   
   > >> >> >> >> > >> >> On Thu, 26 Aug 2010 16:26:35 -0700, Jenn   
   > >> >> >> >> > >> >>  wrote:   
   > >> >> >>   
   > >> >> >> >> > >> >> >In article <9htd76lulep5ob2l6fibsbgjout0d22...@4ax.com>,   
   > >> >> >> >> > >> >> > flipper  wrote:   
   > >> >> >>   
   > >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> On Thu, 26 Aug 2010 15:41:47 -0700, Jenn   
   > >> >> >> >> > >> >> >>  wrote:   
   > >> >> >>   
   > >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >In article   
   > >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> ><4c76d51a.153638...@news.eternal-september.org>,   
   > >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> > s...@spam.com (Don Pearce) wrote:   
   > >> >> >>   
   > >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> On Thu, 26 Aug 2010 21:47:42 +0100, Eeyore   
   > >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >>    
   > >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> wrote:   
   > >> >> >>   
   > >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >Soundhaspriority ( the real one ? )wrote:   
   > >> >> >>   
   > >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> Even worse, we shouldn't have a system where   
   > >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> people   
   > >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> with   
   > >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> defective   
   > >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> genes   
   > >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> (the homos) are reproducing using these   
   > >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> defective   
   > >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> genes by   
   > >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> artificial   
   > >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> means,   
   > >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> or otherwise.   
   > >> >> >>   
   > >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >I know there's a 'redhead gene' but one for   
   > >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >homosexuality ? How   
   > >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >about   
   > >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >bisexuals too ? False argument methinks.   
   > >> >> >>   
   > >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >Graham   
   > >> >> >>   
   > >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> A gene for homosexuality would disappear from the   
   > >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> pool   
   > >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> pretty   
   > >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> quickly,   
   > >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> one would imagine. A bit like a gene for   
   > >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> infertility.   
   > >> >> >>   
   > >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> d   
   > >> >> >>   
   > >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >That might be true if gay people never parented   
   > >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >children.   
   > >> >> >>   
   > >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> Not really because it could be recessive.   
   > >> >> >>   
   > >> >> >> >> > >> >> >True.   
   > >> >> >>   
   > >> >> >> >> > >> >> There's also experimental evidence to suggest it's   
   > >> >> >> >> > >> >> environmental or,   
   > >> >> >> >> > >> >> if genetic, environmentally triggered as you can alter   
   > >> >> >> >> > >> >> the   
   > >> >> >> >> > >> >> incidence   
   > >> >> >> >> > >> >> in rats by manipulating population density.   
   > >> >> >>   
   > >> >> >> >> > >> >> Humans are, of course, more complex but that would   
   > >> >> >> >> > >> >> indicate   
   > >> >> >> >> > >> >> it,   
   > >> >> >> >> > >> >> assuming genetic, could propagate 'the common way',   
   > >> >> >> >> > >> >> absent   
   > >> >> >> >> > >> >> environmental triggers, even if dominate.   
   > >> >> >>   
   > >> >> >> >> > >> >> That also suggests if population density is a consistent   
   > >> >> >> >> > >> >> trigger it   
   > >> >> >> >> > >> >> could be a 'natural' population control mechanism. Or   
   > >> >> >> >> > >> >> not.   
   > >> >> >> >> > >> >> No   
   > >> >> >> >> > >> >> one   
   > >> >> >> >> > >> >> really knows.   
   > >> >> >>   
   > >> >> >> >> > >> >> The oxymoron "gay marriage" is an altogether different   
   > >> >> >> >> > >> >> issue,   
   > >> >> >> >> > >> >> though.   
   > >> >> >>   
   > >> >> >> >> > >> >As opposed to the moronic (without the oxy) legal argument   
   > >> >> >> >> > >> >against it.   
   > >> >> >> >> > >> >;-)   
   > >> >> >>   
   > >> >> >> >> > >> So far, the only thing 'moronic' is your suggestion that any   
   > >> >> >> >> > >> differing   
   > >> >> >> >> > >> opinion is, without even having heard it, 'moronic'.   
   > >> >> >>   
   > >> >> >> >> > >Oh, I've heard the legal arguments.  Why would you jump to the   
   > >> >> >> >> > >conclusion that I consider any opinion different than mine to   
   > >> >> >> >> > >be   
   > >> >> >> >> > >moronic?   
   > >> >> >>   
   > >> >> >> >> > Because you said as much.   
   > >> >> >>   
   > >> >> >> >> > >> I said "oxymoron." a figure of speech that combines   
   > >> >> >> >> > >> normally-contradictory terms,   
   > >> >> >>   
   > >> >> >> >> > >I know the word.  I was doing a "play" on the word.   
   > >> >> >>   
   > >> >> >> >> > >> because it is.   
   > >> >> >>   
   > >> >> >> >> > >> Marriage is, and has been for thousands of years, defined as   
   > >> >> >> >> > >> a   
   > >> >> >> >> > >> heterosexual relationship with "gay," by definition,   
   > >> >> >> >> > >> 'monosexual',   
   > >> >> >> >> > >> so   
   > >> >> >> >> > >> the term, substituting definitions, claims a "monosexual   
   > >> >> >> >> > >> heterosexual   
   > >> >> >> >> > >> relationship."   
   > >> >> >>   
   > >> >> >> >> > >Have you looked up the definition of monosexual?  I happen to   
   > >> >> >> >> > >be   
   > >> >> >> >> > >monosexual, and I presume that you are as well, since most   
   > >> >> >> >> > >people   
   > >> >> >> >> > >are.   
   > >> >> >>   
   > >> >> >> >> > I used it as an adjective to relationship and you know darn   
   > >> >> >> >> > good   
   > >> >> >> >> > and   
   > >> >> >> >> > well what was meant by it.   
   > >> >> >>   
   > >> >> >> >> Kind of like you knew darn good and well that the onymoron/moron   
   > >> >> >> >> thing   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)